Take 2

For some reason unknown to mankind, I've been going through a movie phase. Not just sitting down to watch more movies than usual - although that's kind of true too - but rather a sitting down to watch a particular type of movie. The crappy sequel to a crappy movie. There is much enjoyment to be found in these films, but I think most of it comes from things that the move makers weren't entirely anticipating.

Heard of a movie called The Prince and Me? The original has Julia Stiles and Luke Mably essentially re-enacting an American version of the courtship between Australian commoner Mary Donaldson and Danish Crown Prince Frederick. Sure, they change details - lawyer Mary from Tasmania becomes pre-med university student Paige from Wisconsin, while Prince Frederick becomes Eddie, Prince and soon to be King - but the essential story remains the same. It wasn't intended to be a happy-ever-after chick flick, originally. The ending was altered after audience testing showed people preferred the happy version. The franchise has since produced two further films to create a series. The catch is that Mably was the only one they could convince to come back for the second one, and even he fell by the wayside with the third. The revised Paige was so different from Stiles's character that she was almost unrecognisable. It wasn't just her looks - although going from dress-down casual brunette to glossy glamour blond was a stretch - it was the loss of her sassy edge and drive. The story got the full Disney treatment, complete with the introduction of bad guys plotting against the fairy tale couple. It became predictable and cliched. And funny - but only where the acting was so atrocious. Light hearted fluff as the first film was, it still had something to offer. The sequels had...well, they were good to look at, for the most part.

What about Centrestage, the tale of a wanna-be ballerina who enrols at a prestigious school, only to find herself struggling to make the grade? Not the greatest plot line in history, and hardly original, but still entertaining enough and, if you're into dancing, featuring some good sequences, especially in the knowledge that some of the actors have since gone on to become principals in major dance troupes. They would be the ones who didn't return for the sequel. Given the school setting, however, it was to be expected that there would be a turn over of students, so the premise was good enough to hook people in. But there were differences. The first movie focuses on the ballet, with outside influences only coming in to allow the students to blow off steam. The personal rivalries, sacrifices and jealousies drive what plot there is. The second film, telling the story of a gifted but technically lacking self-taught dancer is almost entirely outside the school, due to the failure of school directors to recognise her talent. The acting was not up there with the first film - which, given how many of the cast were dancers rather than actors is a fairly harsh criticism - but the dancing was certainly thereabouts to the lay person like myself. There was less ballet and more street styles, like break dancing, hip hop, the works. Characters expressed their emotions through the dancing, we are led to believe. A final competition has a predictable outcome, but it's satisfying to see.

Set in different countries, different communities and with supposedly different characters, the sequels all seem to have something in common. Their basic plot lines are the same - outsider coming in, makes a friend but there is someone undermining them that only they can see. Outsider makes good and bad guy is exposed to the world in all their ugliness. As a formula, it works, sure. But it's predictable. So why do I like watching them so much?

I'm known by my flatmates and certain friends for my liking of crap movies. It's no secret that I'm into what many people supposedly in the know would call the lowest forms of pop culture, whether it is books, music, movies or art. I even have a term for the stuff that is crap but enjoyable - quality crap. It's low stress, light on story line, but still entertaining as hell. It's this band that too many sequels fall into. But when, as above, the original movie falls into this category, where does the sequel land? Somewhere below that level, sure, but does that mean it's less worth me checking out? Sometimes, yes. But generally? They may be dull, boring, uninspired or derivative...but I can't look away, all the same.

This post ended up a whole lot more serious than I intended it to. Maybe, much like the writers of sequels, the entertaining side of my brain took a holiday today. Or maybe the vaguely essay-like quality that seems to have come out to play today is a reminder that I ought to be studying. Oh well...More sequels to watch instead!